No announcement yet.

Pet Owners Claim Groomers Negligent

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pet Owners Claim Groomers Negligent

    May 16, 2007

    FORT WORTH, Texas -- Some North Texans have had problems with pet groomers because the law is on the groomers’ side.

    David Brown said a groomer wounded his dog, which required stitches and anesthesia. Karon Reyna said her dog was also wounded.

    “It made me really mad that they would not step up and accept it,” she said.

    Both dogs were groomed by a mobile grooming service called Pet Love. Owner Don Stone said his groomers are experienced and that two Better Business Bureau complaints in 40,000 groomings is good.

    “Occasionally we get somebody we can't satisfy 100 percent, but we do the best we can to satisfy everybody,” he said.

    Pet Love offered Brown four free groomings but disputed Reyna’s complaint.

    “I'm an insurance adjuster. I have to go by the state board of Texas rules,” Reyna said. “Why don't they?”

    State law does not require licenses, inspections or exams for pet groomers. Several Web sites offer to train users in their own homes.

    Grooming company Billi Bonze’s owner Bill Mason has no complaints and said that pet owners should rely on word of mouth.

    “If a person is looking for a groomer, they need to talk to their friends, talk to their veterinarian,” he said.
    Most questions regarding GroomerTALK are answered in the Board Help Talk Forum. Thanks for coming to our community a part of

  • #2
    "Wounded?" This could be a nick or a cut---but either one can happen even to the best of groomers. Sometimes the owners are just difficult, they don't understand and they wouldn't sue somebody over their child getting a cut at the barber!

    Tammy in Utah
    Groomers Helper Affiliate


    • #3
      GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!! These things make me so angry? That groomer did take responsibility for injuring the one dog and offered free groomings. The second one, I couldn't even tell what the injury was. What do they want to happen, if every groomer that injures a dog loses their right to groom? There's a difference between an accident and negligence, and the one obviously was an accident. If every groomer that had an accident was to lose their right to groom I don't know of many of us that would have our jobs. (what's next...people picketing "quick a nail go to jail")? It sure looks like what the mobile groomer owner was saying was edited quite a bit as well, really not giving their side of the story. How come there isn't a story done on "owners who neglect their pets"? You know, where groomers get to show examples of neglected dogs and how poorly some people take care of their pets.
      don't find yourself up a creek without a poodle.


      • #4
        Originally posted by furrybestjob View Post
        GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!! ...
        How come there isn't a story done on "owners who neglect their pets"? You know, where groomers get to show examples of neglected dogs and how poorly some people take care of their pets.

        I would imagine that if there WAS a story about this, the groomers who showed the pictures and talked about it would be out of business. Nobody would want to bring their dogs to them because they were afraid that the groomers would expose them.

        But it would be only fair, right?

        There have been so many that I have wanted to turn in, but there would be business ramifications for sure!


        • #5
          Wow, Pet Love is pretty popular around here. I see their purple vans going all over the place. This story so sucks! Some groomers are educated enough to pass tests and whatever. Thinks happen! Poop happens, we all cut a dog one time or another.